Skip to main content

About your Search

20130204
20130212
STATION
MSNBC 5
MSNBCW 5
CNBC 1
CSPAN 1
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 13
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
the debt ceiling. if republicans had gone into this issue and said they would not raise the debt ceiling unless they got cuts, there would have lost that the raid at the end. big loss that debate. john boehner and paul rand did a great job together. you cannot govern from that office, you but you have to be very careful about high-profile last-minute negotiations. i've worked in the white house and three administrations. the president has a tremendous institutional advantage in these kinds of fights. what republicans have to do is avoid these fights, the straps that they are laying. provide an alternative through passing legislation, just to show this is how they would govern if they had the powers of the presidency and the senate. and be careful. there are some rough edges. host: some are not strategy as far as moving the debt ceiling ahead. guest: if they had gone ahead with it, it would have been politically cataclysmic. it was the worst percival -- worst possible ground to make their point. president obama 1. i think it's absolutely crucial for the future of the country that you cann
ceiling debt debacle of 2011. here is what president obama was demanding. >> at minimum we've got to raise the debt ceiling. so, that's the bare minimum that has to be achieved. >> here is what john boehner and the republicans in the house were demanding. >> the house cannot pass a bill that raises taxes on job creators. the house could only pass a debt limit bill that includes spending cuts larger than the hike in the debt limit as well as real restraints on future spending. >> and here is what john boehner said when the final bill was si signed into law with the dreaded sequester. >> when you look at this final agreement that we came to with the white house, i got 98% of what i wanted. i'm pretty happy. >> to his credit, that's how republicans lindsey graham remembers it as well. >> as john will say it with straight talk, we have our fingerprints as republicans on this proposal, on this sequestration idea. it was the president's idea, according to bob woodward's book, but we as the republican party gagreed to it. we got in this mess together and we're going to have to get out together. >
seems to have pulled the republicans' fangs with respect to the debt ceiling. that's probably the big risk that the market was worried about. >> you made recent changes to your 2013 allocation strategy. some of them are interesting. high volatility u.s. large caps and micro cap stocks. it would seem you're increasing the beta place. when you say u.s. large cap volatile stocks, what do you mean by that? >> well, we believe that there's an evolution in the asset classes that investors are going to be tapping into in the next decade. you know, if you look back over the last 20 years, people spent a lot of time arguing, what was the value stock, what was a growth stock. and a lot of times it was in the eye of the beholder. volatility is a much more objective mesh yasure of what a stock is. you can do very good long term, 80 and 90-year analysis of what this asset class means. and right now, we show high volatility stocks have been beaten down very, very much in the rally, relative to low volatility, sort of bond proxy stocks. that suggests to us that they're one of the best opportunities
. if republicans had time to this issue and said, you know, were not going to raise the debt ceiling unless at a certain amount of cuts, they would've caved in the end, would've been disastrous, much like what the fiscal cliff and i think boehner and right together did a very nice job convincing republicans that you can't govern from the house, but sure to be careful about getting into these high-profile, high-stakes, last-minute negotiations with the president. it worked in the white house, i worked in three administrations. they have a tremendous institutional at vantage in this kind of bias. i think what republicans have to do is avoid these sites come at the straps the democrats and president obama are laying, provide an alternative to passing legislation, just to show them this is how we recover if we have the powers of the presidency and the senate and to be careful and frankly the rougher edges republicans sometimes have. >> host: some republicans aren't happy sr is moving ahead. >> guest: i think if they had gone ahead, it would have been cataclysmic for the republican party. i say
sequestration or the debt ceiling. they are still doing that. the president was successful when he went to the american people, not just rallying democrats, but rallying the people who say let's get on with it, let's try to balance the budget, and the difficulty we have here now is the republicans are just talking about cutting programs, and they have targeted social security, medicaid, and medicare, and the president is saying we have to reform these systems, but we still need more revenue, and this is a worry that they just refuse to discuss. i don't see how you can ignore revenues if you talk about a budget. >> sir, if you will, we look at the time clock ahead of us, we have the state of the union coming up next week, but it's the sequester at the end of the month, the beginning of march, that everybody is worried about and what those cuts will mean in terms of defense spending and what it will mean to low-income families in this country. just a short time ago leon panetta was asked directly about the sequester in his hearing. i want to play it for everybody. >> we've implemented a f
, radical, fiscal conservatives, or supposedly conservative issues like the debt ceiling and fiscal cliff. he is still right in there with more of the highbound tea-party issues. whether it's rand paul or paul ryan for 2016 and i know people want to throw up when they start thinking about 2016 already, but there's a new generation of republican leaders that are jockeying for position and he is a moderate on certain issues. >> i want to put up your magazine cover, and i want to put up your international cover as well. this is -- this is the international cover here. marco rub yo and the next america. no savior mention here. >> we chose that cover line, because, yeah, the switching that is going on right now. we did not think that marco rubio was a internationally famous figure, the way that he is a nationally famous figure. and we wanted to highlight the long-term demographic trends that is taking place in the america. where it's more multi-culture society. one more finally tuned to immigration. that is something that "time" can do as a global brand. >> we will go with that explanation. >>
. it gets sort of mini-half deals. >> that's right. i mean, the sequester, the debt ceiling, fiscal cliff, all these things are not so much real problems as they are manufactured partisan problems. but underneath them, you have this real problem which is basically the republicans won the debate on taxes, and the democrats have won the debate on the safety net. and as a result, that's sort of the deficit that we have. and the question is how can we solve it? and history suggests economic growth is the best way, but this deficit is also big enough in the long term that it's probably not going to be enough. and we need some combination of spending cuts and tax increases as well. >> yeah, how do we make that happen, sam? >> i was going to say, part of the problem is the tax revenue problem, which is that you don't have enough people making good incomes, paying good taxes, which is used to fund the social safety net that we value very highly. but it's also a health spending problem in that we spend a of d a lot of that's end of life health as well. one of the curious things about the health c
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)